Actually it's you who need to get your facts straight about the Queen of Canada. She still has a Corporation Sole that is Canada! She is a British Person not a Canadian!
"The Crown represents the basic political ideals which all Canadians share. It stands for the idea that individual people matter more than theories; that we are all subject to the rule of law. These ideals are guaranteed by a common loyalty, through the sovereign, to community and country.[5]" - Queen Elizabeth II, Regina, 1987
She does not in any way speak for me! Thus her statement is false! I have ZERO loyalty to her. She's just an old rich pompous lady pretending in silly political games.
Canada simply does not need a silly monarchy. It's a stupid anti-democratic tradition that should be epunged from Canada. It's time to move on. It makes those who follow it look like idiots.
Here is your lesson in facts:
The monarchy of Canada, also known as the Canadian monarchy,[1][2] is a constitutional system of government in which a hereditary monarch is the sovereign and head of state of Canada,[3] forming the core of the country's Westminster style parliamentary democracy.[4] The terms Crown in Right of Canada, Her Majesty in Right of Canada, or The Queen in Right of Canada may also be used to refer to the entire executive of the government of Canada. Though the Canadian Crown has its roots in the French and British Crowns, it has evolved over the centuries to become a distinctly Canadian institution.[5] represented by unique symbols, and sometimes being colloquially dubbed the Maple Crown;[6] a term first coined by Governor General Lord Grey in 1905.[7]
The present monarch is Elizabeth II - officially titled Queen of Canada (French: Reine du Canada) - who has reigned since February 6, 1952. She, her consort and other members of the Canadian Royal Family undertake various public and private functions across Canada and on behalf of the country abroad. However, the Queen is the only member of the Royal Family with any constitutional role, holding ultimate executive authority,[4][8] though her Royal Prerogative remains bound by laws enacted by her in parliament and by conventions and precedents,[3] leaving the day-to-day exercise of executive power to her Cabinet. While several powers are the sovereign's alone, most of the royal constitutional and ceremonial duties in Canada are carried out by the Queen's representative, the Governor General;[3] as such, the Governor General can sometimes be referred to as the de facto head of state.[9] In each of Canada's provinces the monarch is represented by a lieutenant governor.[3] The territories are not sovereign, and thus do not have a viceroy.
Since becoming the Governor of California Arnold has murdered-killed-terminated a number of prisoners with so called State Execution when he could have stopped himself from becoming a murderer and saved some lives. It's ironic that a murderer like Arnold "The Govenator" Schwarzenegger decides the release of other murderers, such as Hans Reiser. I guess it takes one to know one...
I used to be a fan of Arnie until I learned about his excessive steroid use and his eagerness to actually kill people.
In fact I'd put pressure on companies providing services to have a higher standard with passwords such as ensuring that they are always stored encrypted, and that their personnel can't read them under any circumstances not even when debugging.
Now that's not always possible with phone in services where they want you to identify yourself to them using a password. Then it's in the clear on the phone and within ear shot. In this case the company should log which of their people saw or hear the password. This is usually possible with customer service records.
As they say "most security threats are from within".
Just take the security of personal freedoms in the USA. Those in charge of the government at this time have stolen much freedom in the double speak name of freedom. Having passwords "stolen" or "remembered off site" is potentially just the same. Much damage could be inflicted upon companies depending on the range access that the admins have that are laid off. Identity theft can occur, etc...
Escorting people out is one way. I've been "let go" a number of times. Usually it's simply two weeks notice and all works out. Other times it's two hours and they have someone watching you the whole time and escorting you out with your two weeks severance. One time it was after I arrived home on a Friday night with a phone call and stuff sent to me via courier. It all depends upon their paranoia factors. Often the reasons are not even told to us. In many ways employees and even contractors and consultants are modern day indentured servants.
Of course finding out that the system admins stole passwords or used them afterwords generally means it was wise for the company to let them go as those kinds of admins are dishonest (maybe more honest than whom they used to work for but still).
Systems really are brittle with many ways to subvert them. Rather than subvert your past employers systems I'd recommend building your own path to financial independence so that you don't need to work for companies that have the power to fire you!
I don't get the person who moderated the parent posting, how on earth was that Trolling? Whom ever moderated is off their rockers.
When I tell people about passwords I always tell them that they need to use a NEW password with each service in case the people at that web site/company look at the password and then use it in identity theft. This makes your privacy more secure. Just don't leave the password information out in the open...
Oh great, we'll be considered genocidal invaders by any cybernetic life forms we meet in space as we infect them with crummy Earth based computer viruses that they have no resistance to! We'd better take Norton, Avg, Sophos, et. al. with us on all future space missions. Nasa now begins searching for computer geeks who'll be able to adapt to outer space. That shouldn't be a problem since we're already sedentary and blobish in many cases. I'd go in for legs to be replaced by a second set of arms if assigned to a permanent space based colony or ship. That way one can type of two keyboards at once. Or use the second set of hands for more, ah hem, pleasant activities while working. Imagine the new yoga positions that are possible with four hands... Knew that complete porn collection from hacking the Intertubes routers would come in doubly handy one day! Now, where is that Nasa application...
The future of the geek is solidified in human culture as long as we remain a science and technology based culture. Now if only we could get those whack nut job religious types to stop their silly myths which permit people to kill each other, we might have a chance to live out our geek inspired futures in objective reality. Forward to the future!
Not all of us Canadians are monarchists. Unfortunately too many are.
It's a stupid and UNDEMOCRATIC tradition that needs to be EXPUNGED from the country! Sure keep it in a museum, but not in politics or government or the courts!
Next time you're in a Canadian Court Object to the Queen on the grounds that it's undemocratic and based on mythologies while the court is supposed to be based upon EVIDENCE! Provide EVIDENCE your Honor (or many pretending to be the judge) for the Queen's inherent rights given by god! Provide Evidence for God! Failing that expunge the Queen and God from the Court and all it's proceedings!
"The average person in Canada doesn't know or care about open-source handsets, and isn't going to care enough to learn."
Ok, but I DO CARE!!! I just bought an Open Moko Phone during the recent iPhone controversy in Canada. I also just got an iPhone when it turned out that Fido would give it to me for FREE since I had enough Fido Dollars (whatever those are, didn't even know I had them) to pay for it fully and beyond. Ok, now the Open Moko is a brick just like my iPhone today (iPhone crashed, Open Moko has been basically useless).
What's next? How do I upgrade OpenMoko phone? Currently it's crap. Gotta get the next stuff onto it. Can't wait for the GPhone stuff.
Ah yes, the GNU Cult Members can't handle accurate criticisms so they censor my comments by moderating the parent comment down. Typical communist control. That's another indication of how you really don't value freedom!
To be a true freedom fighter *YOU MUST* allow others who disagree with you to voice their opinions in the public space *without moderating* them down. Have the guts to hear contrary opinions!
Yes, considering that this is an online forum those comments are quite respectful. No one in person has ever complained about that one bit when I've said it in person or in groups. Only online when people can't take valid criticisms.
"If that's you then fine." caps off the respect by telling you that if you are the uber geek who likes Perl that that is fine with me and all the more power to you. Just don't expect me to like your cryptic language.
The paragraph that you quoted perfectly paints a picture of the typical perl geek that I've meet. Sure, there are variants, but one thing is constant, a love of crypticisms which is fine, love Perl all you want, it's just not me or the corporate types who want clarity and readability.
Yes, I didn't bother to look since it's well known that they added TONS of junk to Perl in those four years and given their pattern of expanding syntax all the time it's reasonable to assume that it's much worse.
Are you saying it got no worse? Were is your counter evidence?
I used plenty of accuracy and respect. I didn't call you names or anything like that. I even quoted Perl people who are unhappy with Perl.
I never called you a dumb dumb, I don't know you well enough to call you that.
The chart likely got worse in the last four years. I have compared the Perl chart against other syntaxes, take Smalltalk for example which is way simpler than Perl's, C++, Java's, Python's, etc.... Coke and Pepsi prove that languages can be very simple indeed and be complete and expandable and comprehensible and powerful and simple to use!
The arguments are good ones, it's just that you are committed to your narrow point of view about Perl and won't admit; you don't want to hear (N) arguments against your precious Perl's complexity. As I said, if you can handle the complexity of Perl all the more power to you; I can't and won't unless forced to due to economic necessity (if the contract calls for it in other words I'll do it and I'll do it well whilst gnashing my teeth). So you can discard the arguments with your ignorance as you wish to but they are still valid and quite to the point.
Languages with straight forward syntaxes that are easy ARE NOT for everyone. There are people who like complex languages like APL and PERL. It gives them a certain satisfaction of being able to "CODE" cryptic programs that others can't do. They are for people who like recursive acronyms; the uber geeks who never get dates and still wear pocket protectors even if you can't see them doing so, or those who like slide rules. If that's you then fine. It's not me. While I can do any cryptic nonsense anyone needs for any paying jobs I don't enjoy it even when successful. I find myself gnashing my teeth since I KNOW how it can be done easier with a simpler syntax.
One reason that languages that rely on syntax to solve problems is that they tend to get more complex as newer problems are identified that push the envelope and call on more "options" which is where new syntax gets added. Rather than simply flushing out the library with these newer fully fleshed out options that cover all the scenarios languages like Perl and APL add new syntax to solve it.
The growth of syntax in regular expressions is also an example of a complex little language getting out of hand. The nasty gnarly putrid line of regular expressions required by the Apache configuration engine to handle URL rewriting is another example of complexity gone mad while not covering all the features needed to solve the problem.
The powerful attraction of syntax comes from the languages that syntax lets you define: you can do a heck of a lot with it, thus people think that a new syntax is always the answer rather than saying hey maybe add in the appropriate syntax for a library of modules or objects so that we can add an infinite amount of new functionality via the library or by simply adding methods/functions to an existing object or creating a new object. No need for a new revision of the language to be sent to everyone.
Syntax is a powerful drug for language designers. In choosing a powerful yet simple syntax like Smalltalk the designer of ZokuScript, heavily influenced by Smalltalk and other languages, takes the point of view that if a feature can be implemented using the library of objects then that is where it should live. This lead to the reduction of syntax overall with one one new substantial addition that provides ZokuScript with meta reflective capabilities required for any mobius self mirroring language - all objects in the virtual machineless system are first class objects including those of the underlying virtual machineless system. All with just one adjustment to the syntax while leaving all the syntax elements the same. Simplicity is retained and actually attained to a higher level since now even message sends can be first class objects using the existing syntax! A meta syntax using the same syntax! A true mobius syntax. Essential for a system - as in lisp - where the distinction between data and program is blur
GNU does not equal FREEDOM as the license rules and the pdf document in the article testify.
From the article's PDF: "Political discussion about the GPL often centers around the "copyleft" requirements of the license. Indeed, the license was designed primarily to embody this licensing feature."
Finally acknowledgment from the horses mouth that GPL is a COMMUNIST leftist style CULT!
If you love freedom vote with your fingers, use BSD based software and other really free licenses (ISC, Apache, MIT, etc...) that provide real freedom from interference by the busy bodies in the GPL CULT and at Richard Stallman's cult headquarters, The Software Freedom Law Center (SFLC).
If you want to connect at the hip and submit to the COLLECTIVE of the GPL BORG COMMUNITY then fine, do that, but you may come to regret it especially if you put a lot of effort into your software development and value your livelihood.
1 to: 100 do: [:index |
Transcript show: index printString; cr ].
Obviously the beauty of simplicity (but not simplistic) is in the eye of the beholder. Hey if you want cryptic crap that's up to you, just don't expect those of us who like clarity to like your cryptic crap.
Languages like Perl are syntax heavy. That is a FACT. Rather than sanely putting the function points into the library new function points are added by adding special syntax over and over again. I'd rather learn additional objects in a library that all use the same simple syntax than have to learn yet another cryptic special case syntax.
C++ is another example of a language that keeps adding syntax, C++0x is going to be a mess with their new syntaxes. Of course it seems reasonable to them to add new keywords and syntax since they don't want to mess with the old syntax and it's meanings, so to avoid confusion they add new syntax. At least though they are learning and have stated that anything that CAN be added via a library will be. Finally some sanity.
The problem with special syntaxes is that they are special, as in, you know, a special needs syntax. In other words, special syntaxes are retarded imho.
In looking at the Smalltalk language a new variant has found ways to eliminate syntax and are doing so for my language. Rather than adding new syntax they are reusing the same existing syntax so that it has multiple meanings with the old meaning being the default and the new meanings being accessed via the library! As a result a *number* (two or three) of syntax elements are removed since they become redundant and ONLY *one* new syntax is added for accessing any meta data in the virtual machine level; something that couldn't be done without. Otherwise all the new features use existing syntax elements or objects in the library (new or existing objects). This is sane. The one new syntax enables the new variant to go where few languages have gone before, allowing all meta information to be accessed as full first class object citizens in the world of objects. This continues, and richly deepens, Smalltalk's tradition of everything being an object. It makes this new variant more Smalltalk than Smalltalk! Making a language more pure with the net outcome of less syntax is the direction to move in. It also, along with some new virtual machine techniques, makes possible very fast native code compilers that meet or exceed the speed of C.
As for proof which you ask for, "easy" is subjective and might vary for each person, thus I've likely lost the argument before I started typing one word. It really depends on how open you are to reasonable arguments and other points of view, or if you are stuck in the one point of view that you have. I prefer multiple points of view myself, which is known as multi-perspective thinking.
First off, technically if the language is turning complete then it can in theory perform any computation as any other language. However, that doesn't make every language desirable or practical to use.
Here is the proof of "ease" you asked for.
(1) By having special syntaxes a language like Perl takes much longer to learn.
(2) It's easier to make mistakes that you can't solve if you don't know all the syntax forms.
(4) A simple syntax at least means that you'll be able to read and comprehend programs in their entirety, while with Perl or C++ or other heavy syntax languages you're stuck wondering what the mess means and scrambling for google or a set of good books on the language (if there are any).
(5) Complex syntax is a serious problem for compiler writers as they are confronted with the complexities
It's the "keeping it minimal" part that the cryptic perl nonsense syntax gets in the way with. If you spend all your time deciphering the perl syntax you have no time for anything else. Sure some are excellent at perl but it's just soooo darn cryptic with sooo many syntaxes many of which just do the same thing redundantly.
I prefer a clean and simple MINIMAL syntax that enables you do get everything done with easy.
Choose your tools wisely as they will come back and bite you.
Turkey today announced it's ambitious plans to construct the worlds best sandwich using the controversial meat, turkey, as the main ingredient. The challenge of course is to have this sandwich be the best in every part of the world. It will be an explosion of Turkish pride into the world the president of Turkey, Mr. Feather, reports. No country, not even the all powerful USA with it's wide selection of sandwiches of mass obesity, will prevail over Turkey in this challenge. The world will have to pay attention to Turkey! Long live the Turkey Sandwich!
Actually using DESIGN rather than hacking for change makes a huge difference. This is the difference that corporate types want (most of the time).
Anyone can be a hacker. Not everyone can *design* software systems.
Perl is hated because it begets a putrid mess!
on
Why Corporates Hate Perl
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Have you actually seen the Perl syntax? It's a horrifying mess designed for people who like twisted grammar puzzles and cryptic codes (and cyptics like RMS who think that recursive acronyms are cool). To express anything clearly in Perl requires a frontal lobotomy and a C-section at the same time (yeah, even if you're male).
It's such a freakish language that it's got syntax for syntax rather than a very clear simple syntactic idea like LISP or Smalltalk or Self or, fuck, even C is easier to comprehend than Perl.
There's an article over here that covers some points why Perl sucks the big one and doesn't even suck well at it! When a language sucks at least I want a good blow job! http://smalltalk.org/articles/article_20040914_a1.html
Professional systems people want their systems to be clear and as easy to grasp as possible, Perl provides the opposite. We ONLY use it when the existing system is using it, and then we only do maintenance bug fixes (lots of those) and do not under any circumstances add new features to programs written in it!
The above are a few reasons that Perl is ostracized from the corporate space and should be excised from your brain.
If you want to hack your way through life, fine, be cryptic and use Perl. If you want excellent systems that perform and get results use a language that helps in that regard: Smalltalk, Lisp, C. Avoid Java, C++. Heck use Assembly Language before Perl!
My iPhone update didn't work at first with a "(-19)" error, the fix for which was to unlock my iPhone with my password. Then I had to reboot my Macintosh, since it has it's own problems, so that iTunes would work. After that the firmware update worked just fine and flawlessly. Par for the course when doing a firmware update on almost any device.
Sure there are a few glitches but overall I'm quite happen with the iPhone. It's not my old flip phone like Kirk's communicator but it's quite fine.
I have had my iPhone for a week now. Nice, but some problems.
For example, I noticed a problem with the sound quality being unpredictable. This was on phone calls with the speaker on and playing music or videos. Always when I was holding the phone. Now I tried to figure it out by moving my fingers around and low and behold it seemed like the problem was touching the metal bit near the bottom power/data port! It felt like one of those electrical interference problems you sometimes get when you touch metal on a stereo or whatnot. On closer examination it turned out that that was a silly notion. What really was going on is that my finger was covering the speaker grill and blocking the sound!!! Apple in their infinite wisdom put the speaker (and on the opposite side the microphone) ports next to the data port on the BOTTOM edge of the iPhone!!! That's about the worst possible place for the speaker as that is just where MY FINGERS like to hang out to support the weight of the iPhone against that annoying pesky aspect of Earth known as Gravity. The iPhone thus FALLS, er, fails the most basic Human Interface Guidelines since it puts the speaker just where my finger wants to go all the time! If I drop the darn thing they are going to get an ear full!
Also the battery life isn't what is advertised with regards to videos. I only get about an hour to an hour and a half playing videos (downloaded flash videos from you tube converted with VLC to mp4, 2mbps, 128kbps audio). Sucks. I have power plugs by all my computers - home, work, play (as in that special kind of play).
Hey, thanks for the excellent information. I'll pick up a couple of cheapo b/g wifi modems for the three rooms in my place...
As for interference there are plenty of modems in the neighborhood... too many... but it could be the layout of my place.
Well even thought the burst mode isn't part of the standard it shouldn't cause Apple's wifi driver to bring DOWN the WHOLE OSX!!! with a Gray Screen Of Death! (GSOD).
Apple has serious problems with their mach not so microkernel since they bloat it with drivers. They need to learn a thing or two from Minix3 it would seem. I've complained to them EACH AND EVERYTIME about their microkernel design with each of the over 100 GSODs that I've gotten since owning this particular MBP.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually it's you who need to get your facts straight about the Queen of Canada. She still has a Corporation Sole that is Canada! She is a British Person not a Canadian!
"The Crown represents the basic political ideals which all Canadians share. It stands for the idea that individual people matter more than theories; that we are all subject to the rule of law. These ideals are guaranteed by a common loyalty, through the sovereign, to community and country.[5]" - Queen Elizabeth II, Regina, 1987
She does not in any way speak for me! Thus her statement is false! I have ZERO loyalty to her. She's just an old rich pompous lady pretending in silly political games.
Canada simply does not need a silly monarchy. It's a stupid anti-democratic tradition that should be epunged from Canada. It's time to move on. It makes those who follow it look like idiots.
Here is your lesson in facts:
The monarchy of Canada, also known as the Canadian monarchy,[1][2] is a constitutional system of government in which a hereditary monarch is the sovereign and head of state of Canada,[3] forming the core of the country's Westminster style parliamentary democracy.[4] The terms Crown in Right of Canada, Her Majesty in Right of Canada, or The Queen in Right of Canada may also be used to refer to the entire executive of the government of Canada. Though the Canadian Crown has its roots in the French and British Crowns, it has evolved over the centuries to become a distinctly Canadian institution.[5] represented by unique symbols, and sometimes being colloquially dubbed the Maple Crown;[6] a term first coined by Governor General Lord Grey in 1905.[7]
The present monarch is Elizabeth II - officially titled Queen of Canada (French: Reine du Canada) - who has reigned since February 6, 1952. She, her consort and other members of the Canadian Royal Family undertake various public and private functions across Canada and on behalf of the country abroad. However, the Queen is the only member of the Royal Family with any constitutional role, holding ultimate executive authority,[4][8] though her Royal Prerogative remains bound by laws enacted by her in parliament and by conventions and precedents,[3] leaving the day-to-day exercise of executive power to her Cabinet. While several powers are the sovereign's alone, most of the royal constitutional and ceremonial duties in Canada are carried out by the Queen's representative, the Governor General;[3] as such, the Governor General can sometimes be referred to as the de facto head of state.[9] In each of Canada's provinces the monarch is represented by a lieutenant governor.[3] The territories are not sovereign, and thus do not have a viceroy.
I'm wondering if the prison system in California will allow Hans Reiser access to a computer to continue his work on the ReiserFS if he so chooses?
Since becoming the Governor of California Arnold has murdered-killed-terminated a number of prisoners with so called State Execution when he could have stopped himself from becoming a murderer and saved some lives. It's ironic that a murderer like Arnold "The Govenator" Schwarzenegger decides the release of other murderers, such as Hans Reiser. I guess it takes one to know one...
I used to be a fan of Arnie until I learned about his excessive steroid use and his eagerness to actually kill people.
In fact I'd put pressure on companies providing services to have a higher standard with passwords such as ensuring that they are always stored encrypted, and that their personnel can't read them under any circumstances not even when debugging.
Now that's not always possible with phone in services where they want you to identify yourself to them using a password. Then it's in the clear on the phone and within ear shot. In this case the company should log which of their people saw or hear the password. This is usually possible with customer service records.
As they say "most security threats are from within".
Just take the security of personal freedoms in the USA. Those in charge of the government at this time have stolen much freedom in the double speak name of freedom. Having passwords "stolen" or "remembered off site" is potentially just the same. Much damage could be inflicted upon companies depending on the range access that the admins have that are laid off. Identity theft can occur, etc...
Escorting people out is one way. I've been "let go" a number of times. Usually it's simply two weeks notice and all works out. Other times it's two hours and they have someone watching you the whole time and escorting you out with your two weeks severance. One time it was after I arrived home on a Friday night with a phone call and stuff sent to me via courier. It all depends upon their paranoia factors. Often the reasons are not even told to us. In many ways employees and even contractors and consultants are modern day indentured servants.
Of course finding out that the system admins stole passwords or used them afterwords generally means it was wise for the company to let them go as those kinds of admins are dishonest (maybe more honest than whom they used to work for but still).
Systems really are brittle with many ways to subvert them. Rather than subvert your past employers systems I'd recommend building your own path to financial independence so that you don't need to work for companies that have the power to fire you!
Or they are lying while they masturbate.
I don't get the person who moderated the parent posting, how on earth was that Trolling? Whom ever moderated is off their rockers.
When I tell people about passwords I always tell them that they need to use a NEW password with each service in case the people at that web site/company look at the password and then use it in identity theft. This makes your privacy more secure. Just don't leave the password information out in the open...
They have a total disregard for security by allowing the support staff to read the passwords.
The customer support people there have a horrific culture of ridiculing their customers. Nasty.
Oh great, we'll be considered genocidal invaders by any cybernetic life forms we meet in space as we infect them with crummy Earth based computer viruses that they have no resistance to! We'd better take Norton, Avg, Sophos, et. al. with us on all future space missions. Nasa now begins searching for computer geeks who'll be able to adapt to outer space. That shouldn't be a problem since we're already sedentary and blobish in many cases. I'd go in for legs to be replaced by a second set of arms if assigned to a permanent space based colony or ship. That way one can type of two keyboards at once. Or use the second set of hands for more, ah hem, pleasant activities while working. Imagine the new yoga positions that are possible with four hands... Knew that complete porn collection from hacking the Intertubes routers would come in doubly handy one day! Now, where is that Nasa application...
The future of the geek is solidified in human culture as long as we remain a science and technology based culture. Now if only we could get those whack nut job religious types to stop their silly myths which permit people to kill each other, we might have a chance to live out our geek inspired futures in objective reality. Forward to the future!
Fuck the Queen!
Not all of us Canadians are monarchists. Unfortunately too many are.
It's a stupid and UNDEMOCRATIC tradition that needs to be EXPUNGED from the country! Sure keep it in a museum, but not in politics or government or the courts!
Next time you're in a Canadian Court Object to the Queen on the grounds that it's undemocratic and based on mythologies while the court is supposed to be based upon EVIDENCE! Provide EVIDENCE your Honor (or many pretending to be the judge) for the Queen's inherent rights given by god! Provide Evidence for God! Failing that expunge the Queen and God from the Court and all it's proceedings!
"The average person in Canada doesn't know or care about open-source handsets, and isn't going to care enough to learn."
Ok, but I DO CARE!!! I just bought an Open Moko Phone during the recent iPhone controversy in Canada. I also just got an iPhone when it turned out that Fido would give it to me for FREE since I had enough Fido Dollars (whatever those are, didn't even know I had them) to pay for it fully and beyond. Ok, now the Open Moko is a brick just like my iPhone today (iPhone crashed, Open Moko has been basically useless).
What's next? How do I upgrade OpenMoko phone? Currently it's crap. Gotta get the next stuff onto it. Can't wait for the GPhone stuff.
Ah yes, the GNU Cult Members can't handle accurate criticisms so they censor my comments by moderating the parent comment down. Typical communist control. That's another indication of how you really don't value freedom!
To be a true freedom fighter *YOU MUST* allow others who disagree with you to voice their opinions in the public space *without moderating* them down. Have the guts to hear contrary opinions!
Yes, considering that this is an online forum those comments are quite respectful. No one in person has ever complained about that one bit when I've said it in person or in groups. Only online when people can't take valid criticisms.
"If that's you then fine." caps off the respect by telling you that if you are the uber geek who likes Perl that that is fine with me and all the more power to you. Just don't expect me to like your cryptic language.
The paragraph that you quoted perfectly paints a picture of the typical perl geek that I've meet. Sure, there are variants, but one thing is constant, a love of crypticisms which is fine, love Perl all you want, it's just not me or the corporate types who want clarity and readability.
Yes, I didn't bother to look since it's well known that they added TONS of junk to Perl in those four years and given their pattern of expanding syntax all the time it's reasonable to assume that it's much worse.
Are you saying it got no worse? Were is your counter evidence?
I used plenty of accuracy and respect. I didn't call you names or anything like that. I even quoted Perl people who are unhappy with Perl.
I never called you a dumb dumb, I don't know you well enough to call you that.
The chart likely got worse in the last four years. I have compared the Perl chart against other syntaxes, take Smalltalk for example which is way simpler than Perl's, C++, Java's, Python's, etc.... Coke and Pepsi prove that languages can be very simple indeed and be complete and expandable and comprehensible and powerful and simple to use!
The arguments are good ones, it's just that you are committed to your narrow point of view about Perl and won't admit; you don't want to hear (N) arguments against your precious Perl's complexity. As I said, if you can handle the complexity of Perl all the more power to you; I can't and won't unless forced to due to economic necessity (if the contract calls for it in other words I'll do it and I'll do it well whilst gnashing my teeth). So you can discard the arguments with your ignorance as you wish to but they are still valid and quite to the point.
Languages with straight forward syntaxes that are easy ARE NOT for everyone. There are people who like complex languages like APL and PERL. It gives them a certain satisfaction of being able to "CODE" cryptic programs that others can't do. They are for people who like recursive acronyms; the uber geeks who never get dates and still wear pocket protectors even if you can't see them doing so, or those who like slide rules. If that's you then fine. It's not me. While I can do any cryptic nonsense anyone needs for any paying jobs I don't enjoy it even when successful. I find myself gnashing my teeth since I KNOW how it can be done easier with a simpler syntax.
One reason that languages that rely on syntax to solve problems is that they tend to get more complex as newer problems are identified that push the envelope and call on more "options" which is where new syntax gets added. Rather than simply flushing out the library with these newer fully fleshed out options that cover all the scenarios languages like Perl and APL add new syntax to solve it.
The growth of syntax in regular expressions is also an example of a complex little language getting out of hand. The nasty gnarly putrid line of regular expressions required by the Apache configuration engine to handle URL rewriting is another example of complexity gone mad while not covering all the features needed to solve the problem.
The powerful attraction of syntax comes from the languages that syntax lets you define: you can do a heck of a lot with it, thus people think that a new syntax is always the answer rather than saying hey maybe add in the appropriate syntax for a library of modules or objects so that we can add an infinite amount of new functionality via the library or by simply adding methods/functions to an existing object or creating a new object. No need for a new revision of the language to be sent to everyone.
Syntax is a powerful drug for language designers. In choosing a powerful yet simple syntax like Smalltalk the designer of ZokuScript, heavily influenced by Smalltalk and other languages, takes the point of view that if a feature can be implemented using the library of objects then that is where it should live. This lead to the reduction of syntax overall with one one new substantial addition that provides ZokuScript with meta reflective capabilities required for any mobius self mirroring language - all objects in the virtual machineless system are first class objects including those of the underlying virtual machineless system. All with just one adjustment to the syntax while leaving all the syntax elements the same. Simplicity is retained and actually attained to a higher level since now even message sends can be first class objects using the existing syntax! A meta syntax using the same syntax! A true mobius syntax. Essential for a system - as in lisp - where the distinction between data and program is blur
More useless rules from the silly gnu cultists.
GNU does not equal FREEDOM as the license rules and the pdf document in the article testify.
From the article's PDF: "Political discussion about the GPL often centers around the "copyleft" requirements of the license. Indeed, the license was designed primarily to embody this licensing feature."
Finally acknowledgment from the horses mouth that GPL is a COMMUNIST leftist style CULT!
If you love freedom vote with your fingers, use BSD based software and other really free licenses (ISC, Apache, MIT, etc...) that provide real freedom from interference by the busy bodies in the GPL CULT and at Richard Stallman's cult headquarters, The Software Freedom Law Center (SFLC).
If you want to connect at the hip and submit to the COLLECTIVE of the GPL BORG COMMUNITY then fine, do that, but you may come to regret it especially if you put a lot of effort into your software development and value your livelihood.
Junk that always looks like this crap
&%*$)#$^%()##!%&T_)^%_!_#!@%&-0
verses awesomeness like this:
1 to: 100 do: [:index |
Transcript show: index printString; cr
].
Obviously the beauty of simplicity (but not simplistic) is in the eye of the beholder. Hey if you want cryptic crap that's up to you, just don't expect those of us who like clarity to like your cryptic crap.
Languages like Perl are syntax heavy. That is a FACT. Rather than sanely putting the function points into the library new function points are added by adding special syntax over and over again. I'd rather learn additional objects in a library that all use the same simple syntax than have to learn yet another cryptic special case syntax.
C++ is another example of a language that keeps adding syntax, C++0x is going to be a mess with their new syntaxes. Of course it seems reasonable to them to add new keywords and syntax since they don't want to mess with the old syntax and it's meanings, so to avoid confusion they add new syntax. At least though they are learning and have stated that anything that CAN be added via a library will be. Finally some sanity.
The problem with special syntaxes is that they are special, as in, you know, a special needs syntax. In other words, special syntaxes are retarded imho.
In looking at the Smalltalk language a new variant has found ways to eliminate syntax and are doing so for my language. Rather than adding new syntax they are reusing the same existing syntax so that it has multiple meanings with the old meaning being the default and the new meanings being accessed via the library! As a result a *number* (two or three) of syntax elements are removed since they become redundant and ONLY *one* new syntax is added for accessing any meta data in the virtual machine level; something that couldn't be done without. Otherwise all the new features use existing syntax elements or objects in the library (new or existing objects). This is sane. The one new syntax enables the new variant to go where few languages have gone before, allowing all meta information to be accessed as full first class object citizens in the world of objects. This continues, and richly deepens, Smalltalk's tradition of everything being an object. It makes this new variant more Smalltalk than Smalltalk! Making a language more pure with the net outcome of less syntax is the direction to move in. It also, along with some new virtual machine techniques, makes possible very fast native code compilers that meet or exceed the speed of C.
As for proof which you ask for, "easy" is subjective and might vary for each person, thus I've likely lost the argument before I started typing one word. It really depends on how open you are to reasonable arguments and other points of view, or if you are stuck in the one point of view that you have. I prefer multiple points of view myself, which is known as multi-perspective thinking.
First off, technically if the language is turning complete then it can in theory perform any computation as any other language. However, that doesn't make every language desirable or practical to use.
Here is the proof of "ease" you asked for.
(1) By having special syntaxes a language like Perl takes much longer to learn.
(2) It's easier to make mistakes that you can't solve if you don't know all the syntax forms.
(3) The Perl Chart of the Elements is proof enough that perl is overly complex: http://smalltalk.org/articles/article_20040914_a1.html.
(4) A simple syntax at least means that you'll be able to read and comprehend programs in their entirety, while with Perl or C++ or other heavy syntax languages you're stuck wondering what the mess means and scrambling for google or a set of good books on the language (if there are any).
(5) Complex syntax is a serious problem for compiler writers as they are confronted with the complexities
It's the "keeping it minimal" part that the cryptic perl nonsense syntax gets in the way with. If you spend all your time deciphering the perl syntax you have no time for anything else. Sure some are excellent at perl but it's just soooo darn cryptic with sooo many syntaxes many of which just do the same thing redundantly.
I prefer a clean and simple MINIMAL syntax that enables you do get everything done with easy.
Choose your tools wisely as they will come back and bite you.
Turkey today announced it's ambitious plans to construct the worlds best sandwich using the controversial meat, turkey, as the main ingredient. The challenge of course is to have this sandwich be the best in every part of the world. It will be an explosion of Turkish pride into the world the president of Turkey, Mr. Feather, reports. No country, not even the all powerful USA with it's wide selection of sandwiches of mass obesity, will prevail over Turkey in this challenge. The world will have to pay attention to Turkey! Long live the Turkey Sandwich!
Nice ugly code chunk you linked to...
Suckless by DESIGN!!!
Actually using DESIGN rather than hacking for change makes a huge difference. This is the difference that corporate types want (most of the time).
Anyone can be a hacker. Not everyone can *design* software systems.
Have you actually seen the Perl syntax? It's a horrifying mess designed for people who like twisted grammar puzzles and cryptic codes (and cyptics like RMS who think that recursive acronyms are cool). To express anything clearly in Perl requires a frontal lobotomy and a C-section at the same time (yeah, even if you're male).
It's such a freakish language that it's got syntax for syntax rather than a very clear simple syntactic idea like LISP or Smalltalk or Self or, fuck, even C is easier to comprehend than Perl.
There's an article over here that covers some points why Perl sucks the big one and doesn't even suck well at it! When a language sucks at least I want a good blow job!
http://smalltalk.org/articles/article_20040914_a1.html
Basically Perl sucks because you need this to figure it out:
http://www.ozonehouse.com/mark/blog/code/PeriodicTable.pdf
Professional systems people want their systems to be clear and as easy to grasp as possible, Perl provides the opposite. We ONLY use it when the existing system is using it, and then we only do maintenance bug fixes (lots of those) and do not under any circumstances add new features to programs written in it!
The above are a few reasons that Perl is ostracized from the corporate space and should be excised from your brain.
If you want to hack your way through life, fine, be cryptic and use Perl. If you want excellent systems that perform and get results use a language that helps in that regard: Smalltalk, Lisp, C. Avoid Java, C++. Heck use Assembly Language before Perl!
My iPhone update didn't work at first with a "(-19)" error, the fix for which was to unlock my iPhone with my password. Then I had to reboot my Macintosh, since it has it's own problems, so that iTunes would work. After that the firmware update worked just fine and flawlessly. Par for the course when doing a firmware update on almost any device.
Sure there are a few glitches but overall I'm quite happen with the iPhone. It's not my old flip phone like Kirk's communicator but it's quite fine.
The chips are connected with Intra-Tubules which are micro versions of The Tubes that connect up the The Internets.
I have had my iPhone for a week now. Nice, but some problems.
For example, I noticed a problem with the sound quality being unpredictable. This was on phone calls with the speaker on and playing music or videos. Always when I was holding the phone. Now I tried to figure it out by moving my fingers around and low and behold it seemed like the problem was touching the metal bit near the bottom power/data port! It felt like one of those electrical interference problems you sometimes get when you touch metal on a stereo or whatnot. On closer examination it turned out that that was a silly notion. What really was going on is that my finger was covering the speaker grill and blocking the sound!!! Apple in their infinite wisdom put the speaker (and on the opposite side the microphone) ports next to the data port on the BOTTOM edge of the iPhone!!! That's about the worst possible place for the speaker as that is just where MY FINGERS like to hang out to support the weight of the iPhone against that annoying pesky aspect of Earth known as Gravity. The iPhone thus FALLS, er, fails the most basic Human Interface Guidelines since it puts the speaker just where my finger wants to go all the time! If I drop the darn thing they are going to get an ear full!
Also the battery life isn't what is advertised with regards to videos. I only get about an hour to an hour and a half playing videos (downloaded flash videos from you tube converted with VLC to mp4, 2mbps, 128kbps audio). Sucks. I have power plugs by all my computers - home, work, play (as in that special kind of play).
Hey, thanks for the excellent information. I'll pick up a couple of cheapo b/g wifi modems for the three rooms in my place...
As for interference there are plenty of modems in the neighborhood... too many... but it could be the layout of my place.
Well even thought the burst mode isn't part of the standard it shouldn't cause Apple's wifi driver to bring DOWN the WHOLE OSX!!! with a Gray Screen Of Death! (GSOD).
Apple has serious problems with their mach not so microkernel since they bloat it with drivers. They need to learn a thing or two from Minix3 it would seem. I've complained to them EACH AND EVERYTIME about their microkernel design with each of the over 100 GSODs that I've gotten since owning this particular MBP.